Page 1 of 3

0632: "Suspicion"

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:00 am UTC
by jakemaheu
Image

Alt-Text: Fine, walk away. I'm gonna go cry into a pint of Ben&Jerry's Brownie Batter(tm) ice cream [link], then take out my frustration on a variety of great flash games from PopCap Games(r) [link].

Discussion: Wow. That's actually pretty good. I wonder if he's referring to ELIZA -> LIZA -> LISA, the AI that posed as a therapist.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:01 am UTC
by brakos82
I saw this one coming from the second panel, and by then the cheese had already caught fire.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:02 am UTC
by iamevn
I do not get.





...but I do like kittens :P

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:02 am UTC
by Freiberg
Now this one was good. Much better than Wednesday's. Thanks for rebounding, Randall.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:02 am UTC
by Justice
kittens!

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:03 am UTC
by Omegaton
Man, I haven't interacted with a chat robot since SmarterChild, and that one didn't push products.

I found it pretty funny, though, haha. Silly computers, unable to read simple words just because they're images and messed up a little.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:03 am UTC
by Eternal Density
This one was pretty fun. Such a doubleCAPTCA test site ought to exist.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:03 am UTC
by Shale
iamevn wrote:I do not get.

It's a capcha. Computer programs can't make out the letters, so requiring somebody to read one is a good way to weed out spambots from posting to message boards, blogs, etc.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:04 am UTC
by dasada122
Oh, wow.
That was very, very good.
The alt text seemed a bit heavy handed though.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:05 am UTC
by iamevn
iamevn wrote:I do not get.





...but I do like kittens :P




NvMd, I Get It Now!

Funniest since Newton/Leibniz?


(But still, KITTENS!!!)

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:05 am UTC
by Piecewise
I would love to see a Dr. Phil show dedicated to this genre of relationship disfunction.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:05 am UTC
by Steve the Pocket
At least he didn't wind up with the spambot that got extra credit on the Turing test. That one would have identified the captcha AND somehow gotten him to screw it up.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:07 am UTC
by XbHW_TestEngr
Seems like he's chatting with my ex-wife. Mind you, we never met in person, used an online minister she suggested, a couples therapy counselor she suggested, and on online divorce attorney ... all in one night. But her line art was crazy wild!

unofficial Approval by a member of the unofficial Council of Elders.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:07 am UTC
by glasnt
Hey, that's not fair :(

I got a shitty captcha :(

Spoiler:
Image


You ruined my life VK's Couple's Testing(tm) [link]


Please forgive me, joee :(


hi joee

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:09 am UTC
by Kimmeh
Omegaton wrote:Man, I haven't interacted with a chat robot since SmarterChild, and that one didn't push products.

I found it pretty funny, though, haha. Silly computers, unable to read simple words just because they're images and messed up a little.


Same here. I also remember trying to make SmarterChild man by insulting him/it. Ahh. Good times...

Nice one Randall. =]

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:12 am UTC
by kbltd

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:16 am UTC
by stormoftara
Once I was chatting with someone online, and they thought I was an online chat bot...


I wasn't even promoting goods and services! I was actually having full blown conversations. People are just too paranoid.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:22 am UTC
by aeris92
Best comic in a LOOooOOong while. This is more like what xkcd should be.

and hi glasnt and joee - what up?

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:26 am UTC
by Comic JK
I enjoyed. Not without problems, since the second panel does telegraph the joke. But it's a good joke! And even though it's about a relationship, there's no nudity! But I still wonder...why didn't they use this method?

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:27 am UTC
by joee
i giggled at this one. But the page was still showing Wednesday's for me, so I had another "oh i hope no one is looking over my shoulder..."

hi glasnt!

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:30 am UTC
by rwald
This comic kind of reminds me of an old SMBC strip. Of course, that one ended rather differently...

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:37 am UTC
by oxy
Wow. I signed up for the forums like yesterday, but got locked out the first time, because I kept failing the humanizer.

I find this ironic.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:38 am UTC
by Omegaton
Comic JK wrote:I enjoyed. Not without problems, since the second panel does telegraph the joke. But it's a good joke! And even though it's about a relationship, there's no nudity! But I still wonder...why didn't they use this method?

Ha, wow, I forgot about that comic. Still cracks me up, apparently.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:39 am UTC
by guale
I finally get a Randall get out of my head moment! My life is complete. Not even an hour ago I was chatting with an ai bot. It was fairly convincing until it started responding to questions with question marks in the middle of the response.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:41 am UTC
by '; DROP DATABASE;--
First Megan, in what looks like (aside from the cops getting involved) a pretty good relationship...

then Lisa who turns out to be lying the whole time...

are you comfortable in my head Randall? Plan on leaving any time soon?

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:43 am UTC
by Max2009
Great comic!! :lol: Does anybody know how to get cheese burns out of a sofa?

stormoftara wrote:Once I was chatting with someone online, and they thought I was an online chat bot...


I wasn't even promoting goods and services! I was actually having full blown conversations. People are just too paranoid.

Hah! That might have been me. I sometimes amuse myself having fake Turing Tests with people online. You'd be surprised how many of them fail to convince me that they're human...

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:48 am UTC
by 8l2255
I liked this one! :D

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:48 am UTC
by irishnut
the trick of the thing is....even if not a bot...could still be a large man wanting to bend you over....i suppose everyone is worried about different things.... *shrugs*

however my cheese was nicely burnt

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:54 am UTC
by frymaster
my only complaint is with the alt text - Popcap's marketing is quite a bit smarter than that...

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:01 am UTC
by knightry
kbltd wrote:VK test - nice touch - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voight-Kampff_machine

Ahh, thank you. This reference was lost on me, sadly.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:04 am UTC
by phillipsjk
oxy wrote:Wow. I signed up for the forums like yesterday, but got locked out the first time, because I kept failing the humanizer.

I find this ironic.


Yes, I reported that problem in the Site/Forum issues: Captcha broken thread months ago. Still haven't gotten around to the "proof of concept" yet though. As I was editing the captcha so that I could read it, I noticed the lines I was "deleting" were distinct enough to be removed by software.

This relates to the comic because of the potential for "false positives." Presumably, an Ad-bot that can pass the Turing test may be able to generate a "false negative" as well. Then there is the challenge: how do you know the testing site can be trusted? If I was writing Ad-bots that were being foiled by such a service, I would set-up my own! We already know the bots regularly suggests sites:
Stickman: Let's get tested together!
Ad-Bot: Ok! how about http://botfriendly.example.com?

Am I going into too much logistical detail here?

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:05 am UTC
by Max2009
Does anybody else pay attention at the bottom of the page where it says
Users browsing this forum:.......?
It lists users, guests and bots.
Are the bots users? Did they fail the capcha when they signed up, and therefore the fora concluded that they are bots? Or is there a sneaky way that bots can tell if somebody is a bot, but nobody wants to tell the humans?

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:06 am UTC
by skine
Reminded me greatly of Blade Runner and this comic:
Spoiler:
Image

Of course, it brings up the question: When we're actually able to create skin-jobs (or replicants if you want me to be Basically Decent), how are we going to deal with the skin-job spambots IRL?




...what if we fall in love?

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:10 am UTC
by TheSkyMovesSideways
Firstly, awesome. :D

Secondly:
kbltd wrote:VK test - nice touch - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voight-Kampff_machine

Oh god, how did I miss that? I blame the fact that I was expecting an "is this supposed to test whether I'm a spambot, or a lesbian?" reference in the alt-text. :roll:

If she passed the Turing test

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:14 am UTC
by Chrisfs
If she passed the Turing test, she can't be all that bad....

Also what the deal with the same disturbing quotes appearing above the comments for three panels in a row now ?

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:15 am UTC
by AlexTG
Not funny, some of us can never do those damned things even though we're human :cry:. Discrimination.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:26 am UTC
by eviloatmeal
This one made me a little sad. She just wanted to have a normal relationship. :(

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:39 am UTC
by Username4242
GOOD THING I DIDN'T CHECK THIS AT WORK.

Oh wait.

Seriously though, pretty hilarious!

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:44 am UTC
by Cynical Idealist
Max2009 wrote:Does anybody else pay attention at the bottom of the page where it says
Users browsing this forum:.......?
It lists users, guests and bots.
Are the bots users? Did they fail the capcha when they signed up, and therefore the fora concluded that they are bots? Or is there a sneaky way that bots can tell if somebody is a bot, but nobody wants to tell the humans?

All the bots seem to be search engine crawlers, and I believe that most crawlers identify themselves to the website that they're indexing. I doubt that they've ever actually logged in, but the forums probably look for that identification and show them as browsing the forum.

Re: "Suspicion" Discussion

Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:48 am UTC
by Kevin11_11
This is a not so subtle reference to the new service from Checked Profiles that verifies pictures used on online dating sites. Obligatory get out of my head Randall note here.

http://www.checkedprofile.com/

http://uk.techcrunch.com/2009/08/20/che ... -of-yours/